• Attali, Y., & Fraenkel, T. (2000). The point‐biserial as a discrimination index for distractors in multiple‐choice items: Deficiencies in usage and an alternative. Journal of Educational Measurement, 37(1), 77-86. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1745-3984.2000.tb01077.x
• Bächtold, M. (2013). What do students “construct” according to constructivism in science education? Research in Science Education, 43(6), 2477-2496. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11165-013-9369-7
• Behera, B. (2012). Constructivism and education. Prangnya-Journal of Social Science, 2(3), 17-21.
• Bozzi, M., Ghislandi, P., Tsukagoshi, K., Matsukawa, M., Wada, M., Nagaoka, N., Pnev, A. B., Zhirnov, A. A., Guillerme, G., & Zani, M. (2019). Highlight misconceptions in physics: A T.I.M.E. project. In Proceedings of INTED2019 Conference (pp. 2520-2525). https://doi.org/10.21125/INTED.2019.0689
• Chala, A. A., & Wami, I. K. S. (2020). Secondary school students beliefs towards learning physics and its influencing factors. Research on Humanities and Social Sciences. https://www.iiste.org/Journals/index.php/RHSS/article/view/52361
• Chellammal, M. (2016). Innovative constructivistic approach of teaching and learning. International Journal of Research-GRANTHAALAYAH, 4(6), 53-56. https://doi.org/10.29121/granthaalayah.v4.i6(SE).2016.2662
• Driver, R., Squires, A., Rushworth, P., & Wood-Robinson, V. (2014). Making sense of secondary science: Research into children’s ideas. Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9781315747415
• Fadaei, A. S., & Mora, C. (2015). An investigation about misconceptions in force and motion in high school. US-China Education Review A, 5(1), 38-45. https://doi.org/10.17265/2161-623X/2015.01.004
• Gurel, D. K., Eryilmaz, A., & McDermott, L. C. (2015). A review and comparison of diagnostic instruments to identify students’ misconceptions in science. Eurasia Journal of Mathematics, Science & Technology Education, 11(5), 989-1008. https://doi.org/10.12973/eurasia.2015.1369a
• Hake, R. R. (1998). Interactive-engagement vs traditional methods: A six-thousand student survey of mechanics test data for introductory physics courses. American Journal of Physics, 66, 64-74. https://doi.org/10.1119/1.18809
• Hake, R. R. (2011, August 8). The impact of concept inventories on physics education and its relevance for engineering education [Invited talk]. The 2^nd Annual National Meeting on STEM Concept Inventories, Washington, D.C., USA. https://www.physics.indiana.edu/~hake/ImpactCI-D-pp.1-103.pdf
• Hestenes, D., Wells, M., & Swackhamer, G. (1992). Force concept inventory. Physics Teacher, 30(3), 141-158. https://doi.org/10.1119/1.2343497
• Juvova, A., Chudy, S., Neumeister, P., Plischke, J., Kvintova, J. (2015). Reflection of constructivist theories in current educational practice. Universal Journal of Educational Research, 3(5), 345-349. https://doi.org/10.13189/ujer.2015.030506
• Kaniawati, I., Fratiwi, N. J., Danawan, A., Suyana, I., Samsudin, A., & Suhendi, E. (2019). Analyzing students misconceptions about Newtons laws through four-tier Newtonian test (FTNT). Journal of Turkish Science Education, 16(1), 110-122. https://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/EJ1265039.pdf
• Kirya, K. R., Mashood, K. K., & Yadav, L. L (2021). A methodological analysis for the development of a circular-motion concept inventory in a Ugandan context by using the Delphi technique. International Journal of Learning, Teaching and Educational Research, 20(10), 61-82. https://doi.org/10.26803/ijlter.20.10.4
• Komakech, R. A., & Osuu, J. R. (2014). Uganda SESEMAT programme: Impact and challenges in its implementation. International Journal of Education and Research, 2(6), 133-146.
• Matthews, M. R. (2012). Philosophical and pedagogical problems with constructivism in science education. Tréma, 38, 40-55. https://doi.org/10.4000/trema.2823
• McLeod, S. A. (2019). Constructivism as a theory for teaching and learning. Simply Psychology. https://www.simplypsychology.org/constructivism.html
• Moradi, M., Liu, L., Luchies, C., Patterson, M. M., & Darban, B. (2018). Enhancing teaching-learning effectiveness by creating online interactive instructional modules for fundamental concepts of physics and mathematics. Education Sciences, 8(3), 109. https://doi.org/10.3390/educsci8030109
• NCDC. (2008). Physics teaching syllabus. National Curriculum Development Centre. https://www.ncdc.go.ug/node/17
• Nik-Daud, N. S., Abd Karim, M. M., Wan Hassan, S. W., & Rahman, N. (2015). Misconception and difficulties in introductory physics among high school and university students: An overview in mechanics. EDUCATUM Journal of Science, Mathematics and Technology, 2(1), 34-47.
• Pfundt, H., & Duit, R. (1994). Bibliography: Students’ alternative frameworks and science education. IPN. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02461758
• Porter, L., Taylor, C., & Webb, K. C. (2014). Leveraging open source principles for flexible concept inventory development. In Proceedings of the 2014 Conference on Innovation & Technology in Computer Science Education (pp. 243-248). https://doi.org/10.1145/2591708.2591722
• Sands, D., Parker, M., Hedgeland, H., Jordan, S., & Galloway, R. (2018). Using concept inventories to measure understanding. Higher Education Pedagogies, 3(1), 173-182. https://doi.org/10.1080/23752696.2018.1433546
• Singh, S., & Yaduvanshi, S. (2015). Constructivism in science classroom: Why and how. International Journal of Scientific and Research Publications, 5(3), 1-5.
• Ssempala, F. (2017). Science teachers’ understanding and practice of inquiry-based instruction in Uganda [Doctoral dissertation, Syracuse University].
• Taherdoost, H. (2016). Sampling methods in research methodology; How to choose a sampling technique for research. SSRN Electronic Journal, 5(2), 18-27. https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.3205035
• UNEB. (2014). A report on the 2013 Uganda certificate of education (UCE) results. Uganda National Examinations Board. https://uneb.ac.ug/
• UNEB. (2019). A report on the 2018 Uganda certificate of education (UCE) results. Uganda National Examinations Board. https://uneb.ac.ug/

APA

Kirya, K. R., Nuru, T. S., & Yadav, L. L. (2022). Conceptual understanding of force concepts in the Ugandan context: A thread assessing performance and misconceptions. Journal of Mathematics and Science Teacher, 2(1), em008. https://doi.org/10.29333/mathsciteacher/12049

Vancouver

Kirya KR, Nuru TS, Yadav LL. Conceptual understanding of force concepts in the Ugandan context: A thread assessing performance and misconceptions. Journal of Mathematics and Science Teacher. 2022;2(1):em008. https://doi.org/10.29333/mathsciteacher/12049

AMA

Kirya KR, Nuru TS, Yadav LL. Conceptual understanding of force concepts in the Ugandan context: A thread assessing performance and misconceptions. Journal of Mathematics and Science Teacher. 2022;2(1), em008. https://doi.org/10.29333/mathsciteacher/12049

Chicago

Kirya, Kent Robert, Tindi Seje Nuru, and Lakhan Lal Yadav. "Conceptual understanding of force concepts in the Ugandan context: A thread assessing performance and misconceptions". Journal of Mathematics and Science Teacher 2022 2 no. 1 (2022): em008. https://doi.org/10.29333/mathsciteacher/12049

Harvard

Kirya, K. R., Nuru, T. S., and Yadav, L. L. (2022). Conceptual understanding of force concepts in the Ugandan context: A thread assessing performance and misconceptions. Journal of Mathematics and Science Teacher, 2(1), em008. https://doi.org/10.29333/mathsciteacher/12049

MLA

Kirya, Kent Robert et al. "Conceptual understanding of force concepts in the Ugandan context: A thread assessing performance and misconceptions". Journal of Mathematics and Science Teacher, vol. 2, no. 1, 2022, em008. https://doi.org/10.29333/mathsciteacher/12049